Retention, Tenure and Promotion (RTP) Standards - University

Definition:

The process for decisions regarding promotion, tenure and retention of faculty unit employees of CSU San Marcos shall be governed by the Faculty Personnel Procedures for Promotion, Tenure and Retention.

Authority:

The collective bargaining agreement between The California State University and the California Faculty Association.

Procedure

Each faculty member shall have a Personnel Action File (PAF). This is a confidential file with exclusive access of the faculty member and persons with official business. (11)

The President of the University designates where such files will be kept and who will act as Custodian of the File (COF). The COF will keep a log of all requests to see each file. The COF shall monitor the progress of all evaluations ensuring that proper notification of each step of the evaluation is given to the Candidate, each committee and administrator as specified in these procedures. (11)

The PAF is the one official personnel file for employment information relevant to personnel recommendation or personnel actions regarding a Candidate. Faculty members may review all material in their PAF, including pre-employment materials. Faculty members may submit rebuttals to any item in the file, except for pre-employment materials. Faculty may request the removal of any letters of reprimand that are more than three years old. (18) Material submitted to the PAF must be identified by the source generating the material. Identification shall indicate the author, the committee, the campus office, or the name of the officially authorized body generating the material. (11)

Contents of Personnel Action File (PAF). The PAF contains the following materials:

All recommendations and decision letters that have been part of the RTP process.

All indices of all WPAFs.

The file concerning initial appointment.

A curriculum vitae from each review.

The Candidate’s summaries for each RTP-related review.

All rebuttals and responses.

Letters of commendation.

Letters of reprimand, until removed under CBA Article18.

All fifth year post-tenure reviews.

Documentation of any merit awards or salary adjustments.

B) Working Personnel Action File (WPAF)

During periods of evaluation, the Candidate shall create a WPAF specifically for the purpose of evaluation. It shall contain all required forms and documents, all information provided by the Candidate, and information provided by faculty unit employees, students, and academic administrators. The WPAF is deemed incorporated by reference in the Personnel Action File (PAF) during the period of evaluation. (15)

The WPAF is part of the review process. All parties to the review shall maintain confidentiality regarding this file. (15)

The President, Peer Review Committee members, Department Chair (only if the Chair completes a separate Department Chair review), Promotion and Tenure Committee members, Custodian of the File and persons with official business shall have access to the file. (11)

The WPAF shall be complete by the deadline announced in the RTP Timetable. Any material added after that date (e.g., a publication listed as “in press” and subsequently published, a grant application funded after the WPAF submission date, course evaluations unavailable at time files were due, or conference proposals accepted after file has been submitted) must have the approval of the Peer Review Committee and must be material that becomes available only after the closure date. New materials must be reviewed, evaluated, and commented upon by the Peer Review Committee and the Department Chair (if applicable) before consideration at subsequent levels of review. Once approved by the PRC, the Dean and subsequent reviewers shall be notified simultaneously and they have the option of changing recommendations. (15)

Guidance on the WPAF
(a) An item in the WPAF may be included in whichever category the Candidate sees as the best fit. However, a single item may not be inserted in two different categories.
(b)The emphasis of the WPAF will be on the accomplishments of the Candidate since the beginning of the last university-level review and not included as part of that review, i.e., items can only be considered in one promotion review. For retention review, the emphasis will be on the time period since the last retention review. For promotion to Associate Professor /Associate Librarian/SSP II AR or tenure, the emphasis will be on the time period since hiring. For promotion to Professor/Librarian/SSP-AR III, the emphasis will be on the time period since the review for the Candidate’s last promotion or since hiring if hired as an Associate Professor /Associate Librarian/SSP II AR.
(c) If service credit was awarded, the Candidate should include evidence of accomplishments from the other institution(s) for the most recent years of employment.
(d) This procedures document does not specify standards. Each Department may develop its own standards, including guidance on criteria in that unit, in accordance with the “Guidelines for Department RTP Standards” (September 28, 2009). It is the responsibility of the Candidate to seek out and understand these standards. See V.A.1. and V.B.5. below.
(e) In constructing the WPAF, the Candidate should be selective, choosing documents, texts, or artifacts that are most significant and representative of their work. The WPAF should be focused and manageable. In order for a Candidate to make the best case while minimizing file size, statements such as “available upon request” may be used. Materials mentioned as “available upon request” or cited in reflective statement and/or curriculum vitae are considered part of the WPAF. Reviewers at any level can obtain such documentation during the time of the review directly from the Candidate or directly from the cited source, without the notification of any other level of review. Information in the public domain relevant to the material presented in the WPAF, but not specific to the Candidate (e.g., journal acceptance rates, publication peer-review process, and/or publisher information), are considered part of the WPAF and can be accessed by reviewers at any level without notification.
(f) The evidence of success in Teaching, Research/Creative Activity and Service shall consist of up to 30 items total in the WPAF that are representative of the work described in the narrative. The Candidate will determine how to distribute the items among the three categories; however, each category will contain evidence.
(g) The reflective statements included in the WPAF shall not exceed 15 pages in combined length. The Candidate will determine how many pages to devote to each statement. The statements will describe the Candidate’s contributions in the areas of Teaching, Research/Creative Activity, and Service.
(h) The Candidate shall be notified of the placement of any material in her/his WPAF, and shall be provided with a copy of any material to be placed in the WPAF at least five days prior to such placement. (11)

Material inserted into the WPAF by reviewing parties is subject to rebuttal or request for removal by the faculty member undergoing review.

Required or additional material relevant to the review may be added during the initial period of “review for completeness” by the faculty member undergoing review or other parties to the review.

The WPAF, when submitted by the Candidate, shall contain:
(a) The “WPAF Checklist” (see Faculty Affairs website), completed and signed by the Candidate.
(b) A Memorandum from the Candidate stating the action the Candidate is requesting:
- periodic review (typically 1st/3rd/5th)
- 2nd Year Retention
- 2nd Year Retention with optional tenure and/or promotion review
- 4th Year Retention (3rd or 5th year for faculty off-cycle)
- 4th Year Retention w/ optional Tenure and/or Promotion Review (3rd or 5th year for faculty off-cycle)
- Tenure and/or Promotion Review
(c) A current curriculum vitae including all the accomplishments of the Candidate’s career.
(d) For faculty applying for periodic reviews; retention, tenure, or tenure and promotion, all personnel reviews since hire. For faculty applying for promotion after the award of tenure (or tenure and promotion), all personnel reviews beginning with the previous promotion review or original appointment materials. For faculty applying for tenure after promotion, all personnel reviews beginning with original appointment materials. Personnel reviews (including recommendations, rebuttals and responses) are defined as:
- periodic reviews
- retention, tenure and promotion reviews
- five-year post-tenure reviews
(e) A reflective statement for each section: Teaching, Research/Creative Activity, and Service

Evidence of teaching success (for all faculty unit members who teach) and equivalent professional performance based on primary duties assigned in the job description (for non-teaching faculty).
- The reflective statement on teaching.
- The complete university-prepared reports of the Student Evaluations of Instruction for all courses taught (15.)
- Selected items (a minimum of 1 item) documenting the teaching accomplishments discussed in the reflective statement, such as:

Evidence of success in research and creative activity (for teaching faculty and librarians) and continuing education/professional development (for SSP-ARs).
- The reflective statement on research and creative activity.
- Selected items (a minimum of 1 item) representing research and creative activity, such as:

Selected items (a minimum of 1 item) representing service to the campus, system, community, discipline, and/or profession, such as:
- Committee activity
- Consultantship to community organizations
- Advising a student group
- Mentoring of faculty and/or students
- Office held and participation in professional organizations
- Service award, fellowship or honor
- Editing of a journal, book, or monograph
- Refereeing of a book, journal article, monograph, conference paper
- Other relevant items chosen by the faculty member

A complete index of the material contained in the WPAF. (This should be located at the beginning of the WPAF.)

The WPAF may also be submitted in electronic format. Guidelines for electronic submission may be obtained from the office of the AVP of Faculty Affairs.

II. REVIEW PROCESS SCHEDULE

A) Tenure and Promotion to the Rank of Associate Professor/Associate Librarian/SSP-AR II

All probationary (nontenured) faculty members shall undergo annual review. The normal review process schedule depends on the probationary status of the Candidate. If the Candidate’s initial appointment is on the tenure track at the rank of Assistant Professor, Senior Assistant Librarian (which normally requires a doctorate or other appropriate terminal degree), or SSP-AR I without credit for prior years of service, the review process schedule is as follows:

First, third, and fifth years: PRC level and Dean/Director review

Second and fourth years: PRC, Dean/Director and President review

Sixth year: Mandatory review for promotion and tenure by Department Chair, Peer Review Committee, Dean, and Promotion and Tenure Committee with a recommendation to the President

Tenure-track probationary faculty may be given credit for a maximum of two years of service at another institution. The amount of credit allowed shall be stipulated at the time of employment and documented in a letter to the faculty member. This letter should be included in the file. If one or two years of credit are given, the review process begins with the first year level review. The mandatory promotion and tenure decision is shortened by the number of service credit years given. (13)

If a probationary faculty member without a doctorate or appropriate terminal degree is hired at the rank of Instructor, Assistant Librarian, or SSP-AR I, the Candidate may choose not to count the time as Instructor/Assistant Librarian/SSP-AR I toward the mandatory sixth year tenure and promotion review. The Candidate must stipulate her/his choice at the time of initial appointment to a tenure track position.

Normally, a probationary faculty member shall not be promoted during the probationary period of six years of full-time service. A probationary faculty member shall normally be considered for promotion at the same time they are considered for tenure. Probationary faculty members shall not be promoted beyond the rank of Associate. (13, 14)

At the request of the Candidate or on the initiative of the Department, a Candidate may be considered for Promotion and Tenure prior to the sixth year of service. (13, 14) In that event, the sixth-year-level review substitutes for the annual review. Promotion or tenure prior to the normal year of consideration requires clear evidence that the Candidate has a sustained record of achievement that fulfills all criteria for promotion or tenure as specified in University, College/Library/School, and Department standards. Prior to the final decision, Candidates for promotion before the mandatory sixth-year review may withdraw from consideration without prejudice at any level of review. (14)

Mandatory sixth-year consideration entails recommendations to the President for the Candidate’s tenure and promotion. (13)

Nontenured Associate Professors/Professors, Associate Librarians/Librarians, and SSP-AR II/SSP-AR IIIs shall be reviewed annually according to the following schedule:

First, third, and fifth years: PRC level and Dean/Director review

Second and fourth years: PRC, Dean/Director and President review

Sixth year: Mandatory review for tenure by the Department Chair, Peer Review Committee, Dean, and Promotion and Tenure Committee recommendation to the President.

Tenure-track probationary faculty may be given credit for a maximum of two years of service at another institution. The amount of credit allowed shall be stipulated at the time of employment. (13) The appointment letter shall be included in the WPAF

Normally, a probationary faculty member shall not be promoted during the probationary period of six years of full-time service. (14) A probationary faculty member shall normally be considered for promotion at the same time they are considered for tenure. (13)

At the request of the Candidate or on the initiative of the Department, a Candidate may be considered for Promotion and Tenure prior to the sixth year of service. In that event, the sixth-year-level review substitutes for the annual review. The President may award tenure to a faculty unit employee before the normal six year probationary period. (13, 14) Promotion and tenure prior to the normal year of consideration requires clear evidence that the Candidate has a sustained record of achievement that fulfills all criteria for promotion or tenure as specified in University, College/Library/School, and Department standards. Prior to the final decision, Candidates for promotion before the mandatory sixth-year review may withdraw from consideration without prejudice at any level of review. (14)

Tenure review for probationary Associate Professor /Associate Librarian/SSP-AR II is separate and distinct from review for promotion to the rank of Professor /Librarian/SSP-AR III. Probationary faculty shall not be promoted beyond the rank of Associate. (14) In other words, Associate Professors/Associate Librarians/SSP-AR IIs must be awarded tenure before they are eligible to apply for promotion to Full Professor/Librarian/SSP-AR III.

C) Review of Tenured Faculty at Rank other than Professor/Librarian/SSP-AR III Ranks

Except for early promotion considerations, review for promotion to the rank of Professor, Librarian, or SSP-AR III follows the standard sequence of review for tenure: Department Chair (at the Department Chair’s discretion) and Peer Review Committee, Dean/Director, Promotion and Tenure Committee making recommendations to the President.

Only tenured faculty unit employees with rank of Professor/Librarian/SSP-AR III can make recommendations regarding promotion to these ranks. (Professors/Librarians/SSP-AR IIIs may make recommendations for promotion across these positions.)

The promotion of a tenured faculty unit employee normally shall be effective the beginning of the sixth year after appointment to their current academic rank/classification. In such cases, the performance review for promotion shall take place during the year preceding the effective date of the promotion. This provision shall not apply if the faculty unit employee requests in writing that they not be considered. (14.3)

The promotion of a faculty unit member to the rank of Professor, Librarian, or SSP-AR III that will be effective prior to the start of the sixth year after appointment to their current academic rank/classification is considered an “early promotion.” Promotion prior to the normal year of consideration requires clear evidence that the Candidate has a sustained record of achievement that fulfills all criteria for promotion as specified in University, College/Library/School, and Department standards. For early promotion, a sustained record of achievement should demonstrate that the Candidate has a record comparable to that of a Candidate who successfully meets the criteria in all three categories for promotion in the normal period of service.

D) Except for denial of tenure in the mandatory sixth-year review, denial of tenure and/or promotion does not preclude subsequent review.
1. Probationary faculty denied tenure prior to the sixth year may be considered in any subsequent year through the mandatory sixth-year review.
2. Tenured Assistant/Associate Professors, Senior Assistant/Associate Librarians, and SSP-AR I/IIs denied promotion may be reviewed in any subsequent year.

III. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THOSE INVOLVED IN THE REVIEW CYCLE

A) Responsibilities of the Candidate

Preparation of the WPAF
a. Prior to the beginning of the review process, the Candidate shall be responsible for reviewing these procedures, as well as the Department/Unit/College/Library/School/SSP-AR evaluation criteria and review procedures that have been made available, including the CSUSM RTP timetable.
b. Prior to the beginning of the review process, the Candidate shall be responsible for consulting campus resources relevant to the review process (e.g., the CBA, Academic Affairs, Faculty Center resources and workshops, and colleagues).
c. Prior to the beginning of the review process, the Candidate shall be responsible for the identification of materials the Candidate wishes to be considered and for the submission of such materials as may be accessible to the Candidate. (15)
d. The Candidate shall be responsible for the organization and comprehensiveness of the WPAF.
e. If the Candidate is requested to remove any material from the WPAF, the Candidate can either remove the material or add explanations to the reflective statement about the relevance of the material.
f. If the Candidate chooses to withdraw a request for early tenure, then the Candidate shall notify the Custodian of the File. The COF will then notify all levels and designate the evaluation as the regularly-scheduled review. All levels of reviewers would then need to conduct a review of the WPAF, starting with the PRC. The recommendations for the early tenure review shall be withdrawn and would not be placed in the PAF.
g. If the Candidate is denied, the recommendations will be placed in the PAF.

The Candidate is responsible for submission of the WPAF in adherence to the RTP Timetable.

The Candidate is responsible for preparing, as necessary, a timely rebuttal or response at each level of the review according to the RTP Timetable.

The Candidate is responsible for requesting a meeting, if wanted, at each level of the review according to the RTP Timetable. No formal, written response is required subsequent to this meeting.

The Candidate may request and an external review. (15) The process for initiation and selection of external reviewers is set forth in Appendix C.

B) Responsibilities of Department Chairs and Faculty Governance Units

In academic units with a Department Chair, the Chair shall ensure that there is an election of a PRC. This entails: identifying eligible members of the Department or equivalent academic unit, College/Library/School, or the entire University faculty, when necessary, who are willing to serve; consulting with faculty in the Department about names to place on the ballot; sending out the ballot one week before the election date; ensuring that ballots are counted by a neutral party; and announcing the results to the Department and to the Candidates. The Department Chair shall convene the first meeting of the PRC and ensure that a chair is elected.

In academic units with no Department Chair, the appropriate faculty governance group shall ensure that there is an election of a PRC. This entails: identifying eligible members of the Department or equivalent academic unit, College/Library/School, or the entire University faculty, when necessary, who are willing to serve; consulting with faculty in the Department about names to place on the ballot; sending out the ballot one week before the election date; ensuring that ballots are counted by a neutral party; and announcing the results to the Department and to the Candidates. The appropriate faculty governance group shall convene the first meeting of the PRC and ensure that a chair is elected.

The Department Chair may submit a separate recommendation concerning retention, tenure, and/or promotion under the following conditions: The Department Chair must be tenured and the Department Chair must be of equal or higher rank than the level of promotion requested by the Candidate. The Department Chair’s review runs concurrently with the PRC review. When a Department Chair chooses to make a separate recommendation in a given year, the Chair must do so for all Candidates in the Department in that year for which the Chair is eligible to submit a recommendation. In this case, Department Chairs shall have the additional responsibilities indicated below. If the Department Chair is a member of the PRC, the Chair may not make a separate recommendation.
1. During the time specified for this activity, the Department Chair shall review the file for completeness. Within seven days of the submission deadline the Department Chair shall:

Submit a letter to the Custodian of the File outlining material that is lacking. The custodian notifies the faculty member.

Add any existing material missing from the file that the faculty member did not add. The Department Chair must add the required evidence, but may choose not to add the non-mandatory additional evidence requested.

2. The Department Chair may determine whether to request external review of the file. In the case of external review request, see Appendix C for responsibilities and timetable.
3. Consistent with the CBA, the Department/Unit/College/Library/School/SSP-AR RTP documents and the RTP Timetable, the Department Chair shall review and evaluate the WPAF of each Candidate for retention, tenure, and promotion.
4.The Department Chair may write a recommendation with supporting arguments to “The file of [the faculty member under review].” The Department Chair’s recommendation is a separate and independent report from that of the PRC.

The recommendation shall be based on the contents of the WPAF. (15.12.c)

5. The Department Chair shall submit the recommendation to the Custodian of the File by the deadline specified in the RTP Timetable.

6. The Candidate may request a meeting with the Department Chair within ten (10) days of receipt of the Department Chair’s recommendation (15). If a meeting is requested, the Department Chair shall attend the meeting. No formal, written response is required subsequent to this meeting.
7. The Department Chair may respond to a Candidate’s written rebuttal or response within ten (10) days of receipt. No formal, written response to a Candidate rebuttal or response is required.
8. Should the P & T Committee call a meeting of all previous levels of review, the Department Chair shall attend and revise or reaffirm her/his recommendation. The Department Chair shall then submit in writing her/his recommendation to the Custodian of the File consistent with the RTP Timetable.
9. The Department Chair shall maintain confidentiality of the file, of deliberations and recommendations. (15)
10. When Department Chairs submit a separate recommendation for Candidates in their Departments, they are ineligible to serve on Peer Review Committees in their respective Departments, but may serve on PRC’s in other Departments. Department Chairs, like other parties to the review, may not serve at more than one level of review.

If a Department Chair chooses not to make a separate recommendation, then the Chair may serve on any Peer Review Committees within her or his academic unit.

If any stage of a Performance Review has not been completed according to the RTP Timetable, the WPAF shall be automatically transferred to the next level of review or appropriate administrator and the Candidate shall be so notified. (15)

C) Election and Composition of the Peer Review Committee (PRC)

The Department or appropriate academic unit is responsible for determining the size and election conditions of the PRC. The Department Chair shall ensure that there is an election of a PRC. Where no Department Chair exists, the department or appropriate faculty governance unit will ensure that there is an election of a PRC. (See IV.B.1. and 2. above.)

The PRC shall be composed of at least three full-time tenured faculty elected by tenure-track faculty in the Candidate’s department (or equivalent), with the chair elected by the committee. That is, if there are enough eligible faculty members in a department or program, members of the Peer Review Committee are elected from these areas. If not, the department or program shall elect Peer Review Committee members from eligible university faculty in related academic disciplines. (15)

In the case of a faculty member with a joint appointment, the Peer Review Committee shall include when possible representatives from both areas with a majority of members on the committee elected from the Department or program holding the majority of the faculty member’s appointment. If a faculty member holds a 50/50 joint appointment, the committee will have representatives from both departments.

Peer Review Committee members must have higher rank/classification than those being considered for promotion.

Candidates for promotion are ineligible for service on promotion or tenure Peer Review Committees.

Each College/Library/School/SSP-AR shall adopt procedures for electing a Peer Review Committee from the eligible faculty. These procedures must follow the guidelines of the CBA. (15)

D) Responsibilities of the Peer Review Committee (PRC)

The PRC shall review the WPAF for completeness. Within seven days of the submission deadline the PRC shall:
(a) Submit a letter to the Custodian of the File outlining material that is lacking. If no WPAF has been submitted, the PRC shall submit a letter to the Custodian of the File within the same deadline indicating that the WPAF is lacking.
(b) Add any existing required material missing from the WPAF that the Candidate has not added via the COF. (15)
(c) Add any additional existing material with written consent of the Candidate.
(d) Request any irrelevant material to be removed from the WPAF.

The PRC shall determine whether to request external review of the WPAF. In the case of an external review request, see Appendix C for responsibilities and timeline.

Consistent with the CBA, the Department/College/Library/School/SSP-AR RTP standards/ documents, the University RTP document, and the RTP Timetable:
(a) The PRC shall review and evaluate the WPAF of each Candidate for retention, promotion, and/or tenure.
(b) Each committee member shall make an individual evaluation prior to the discussion of any specific case.

The PRC shall meet as an entire committee face-to-face. In these meetings, each member shall comment upon the Candidate’s qualifications under each category of evaluation.

The PRC shall write a recommendation with supporting arguments to “The file of [the faculty member under review].” (See Appendix E.) The PRC’s recommendation is a separate, independent report from that of the Department Chair.
(a) The recommendation shall be based on the contents of the WPAF. (15)
(b) The recommendation clearly shall endorse or disapprove of the retention, tenure, and/or promotion.

Each recommendation shall be approved by a simple majority of the committee. To maintain confidentiality, the vote for recommendations shall be conducted by printed, secret ballot. (See Appendix D.) The report of the vote shall be anonymous. Committee members may not abstain in the final vote. The vote tally shall not be included in the letter. Dissenting opinions shall be incorporated into the text of the final recommendation. When the vote is unanimous, the report shall so indicate. All members of the committee shall sign the letter. (See Appendix E.)

The PRC shall submit the recommendation to the Custodian of the File by the deadline specified in the RTP Timetable.

Should the Candidate call a meeting within ten (10) days of receipt of the PRC’s recommendation, the PRC shall attend the meeting. (15) No formal, written response is required subsequent to this meeting.

The PRC may respond to a Candidate’s written rebuttal or response within ten (10) days of receipt of rebuttal. No formal, written response to a Candidate rebuttal or response is required.

Should the P & T Committee call a meeting of all previous levels of review, the PRC shall attend and revise or reaffirm their recommendation. The PRC shall then submit in writing their recommendation to the Custodian of the File consistent with the RTP Timetable.

The PRC shall maintain confidentiality of the file, of deliberations and recommendations (15).

The WPAF shall be automatically transferred to the next level of review or appropriate administrator and the faculty unit employee shall be so notified. (15)

E) Responsibilities of the Dean/Director

The Dean/Director shall review the file for completeness. Within seven days of the submission deadline, the Dean/Director shall:
(a) Submit a letter to the Custodian of the File outlining material that is lacking.
(b) If the requested missing material is not added, the Dean/Director shall have the COF insert that material. (15)
(c) Request any irrelevant material to be removed from the WPAF.
(d) The Custodian of the File shall notify the faculty member of any material added to the file.

The Dean/Director shall determine whether to request external review of the file. In the case of an external review request, see Appendix C for responsibilities and timeline.

The Dean/Director shall review and evaluate the WPAF of each Candidate for retention, tenure, and/or promotion, consistent with the CBA, Department/Unit/College/Library/School/SSP-AR RTP document, the University RTP document, and the RTP Timetable.

The Dean/Director shall write a recommendation with supporting arguments addressed “To the file of [the name of the Candidate].”
(a) The recommendation shall be based on the contents of the WPAF. (15)
(b) The recommendation shall clearly endorse or disapprove retention, tenure and/or promotion.

The Dean/Director shall submit the recommendation to the Custodian of the File by the deadline specified in the RTP Timetable.

Should the Candidate call a meeting within ten (10) days of receipt of the Dean/Director’s recommendation (15), the Dean/Director shall attend the meeting. No response is required.

Should the Candidate submit a rebuttal or response, the Dean/Director may respond to the rebuttal in writing within ten (10) days of receipt. No formal, written response to the Candidate’s rebuttal or response is required.

Should the Promotion and Tenure Committee call a meeting of all the previous levels of review, the Dean/Director shall attend and revise or reaffirm her/his recommendation. The Dean/Director shall then submit, in writing, her/his recommendation to the Custodian of the File.

The Dean/Director shall maintain the confidentiality of deliberations and recommendations (15).

F) Composition of the Promotion and Tenure (P & T) Committee6

The University Promotion and Tenure Committee shall be composed of seven members: six tenured Full Professors and one tenured Full Librarian elected in accordance with the rules and procedures of the Academic Senate. Candidates for election to the Committee shall be voting members of the Faculty as defined in the by-laws of the CSUSM Academic Senate.

The six Professors shall be elected as follows: One (1) from the College of Education, Health, and Human Services; one (1) from the College of Business Administration; two (2) from the College of Humanities, Arts, Behavioral and Social Sciences (these must come from different Divisions within the College), one (1) from the College of Science and Mathematics; and one (1) university-wide at-large member. When SSP-ARs are under review a member of SSP-AR III will be added to the P & T Committee for the SSP-AR review only.

For various reasons of ineligibility, the Promotion and Tenure Committee may lack the full set of members. If Committee membership falls below five, the Senate shall hold a replacement election or an at-large election as appropriate to ensure a minimum of five members for the Committee. Faculty with specified roles in assessing, directing, or counseling faculty in relation to their professional responsibilities are ineligible for service (e.g., Director of General Education, Director of the Faculty Center).

Each year, the members of the Committee shall elect the Chair. They will hold this election during the spring semester preceding the year of service on the Committee.

Members of the Promotion and Tenure Committee are ineligible to serve at any other level of review. That is, they cannot make recommendations as Department Chairs or members of Peer Review Committees for any Candidates during their term as members of the Promotion and Tenure Committee.

G) Responsibilities of the Promotion and Tenure Committee

The P & T Committee shall review for completeness each file from all Candidates for promotion and/or tenure. In order to complete this review within seven days of the submission deadline, the Chair shall assign two members of the Committee to each file. These members will report their findings to the Chair within the specified deadline.

The P & T Committee shall identify, request and provide existing materials related to evaluation which do not appear in the file and request that any irrelevant material be removed from the file. In cases where the Committee members request that the Candidate add or remove material to the file, this request shall be made in writing to the Custodian of the File within the specified deadline. In cases where the Committee members add material to the file via the COF, they shall do so within the specified deadline. The Custodian of the File shall inform the Candidate of this addition.

The P & T Committee shall determine whether to request external review. The members assigned to review each file for completion shall arrive at an independent assessment of the need for external review. The full Committee shall meet at the end of this initial review period to determine the need for external review. The Committee shall conduct a simple majority vote to determine whether or not an external review shall be requested. In the case of external review, see Appendix C for External Review.

Consistent with the CBA, the Department/Unit/Library/School/SSP-AR RTP standards/documents, the University RTP document and the RTP timetable, the P & T Committee shall review and evaluate the WPAF of each Candidate for tenure and/or promotion. Each committee member shall make an individual assessment prior to the discussion of any specific case.

The P & T Committee shall meet as an entire committee face-to-face concerning each of the WPAFs. In these meetings, each member shall comment upon the Candidate’s qualifications under each category of evaluation.

The P & T Committee shall write a clear recommendation, addressed “To the file of [the Candidate]” with supporting arguments. (See Appendix E.) Each recommendation shall be approved by a simple majority of the committee. The Chair shall vote. Because the CBA states that “[t]he end product of each level of a Performance Review shall be a written recommendation,” (15) a report of a tie vote does not constitute an acceptable action of the Committee. The P & T Committee must recommend for or against promotion and/or tenure.

The report of the vote shall be anonymous. Committee members may not abstain in the final vote. The vote tally shall not be included in the letter. Dissenting opinions shall be incorporated into the text of the final recommendation. When the vote is unanimous, the report shall so indicate. All members of the committee shall sign the letter.

The P & T Committee shall provide a copy of the recommendation to the Custodian of the File by the deadline specified in the RTP Timetable.

Should the Candidate call a meeting within ten (10) days of receipt of the P & T Committee’s recommendation, the P & T Committee shall attend the meeting. (15) No formal written response is required subsequent to this meeting.

Should the Candidate submit a rebuttal or response, the P & T Committee may respond to the rebuttal or response in writing within ten (10) days of receipt. No formal written response to the Candidate’s rebuttal or response is required.

When there is disagreement in the recommendations at any level of review, the P & T Committee shall call a conference involving all levels of the review, i.e., the Department Chair, the Peer Review Committee, the Dean, and the Promotion and Tenure Committee itself. The P & T Committee shall schedule this meeting within seven days after the designated deadline for the Candidate to respond to the Promotion and Tenure Committee’s recommendation. All members of the P & T Committee shall attend this meeting.

Subsequent to such a meeting, the P & T Committee shall revise or reaffirm their recommendations. The P & T Committee shall then submit in writing their recommendation to the Custodian of the File consistent with the RTP Timetable.

The P & T Committee shall maintain confidentiality of the file, of deliberations and recommendations, (15).

If the P & T Review has not been completed according to the RTP Timetable, the WPAF shall be automatically transferred to the next level of review and the faculty unit employee shall be so notified. (15)

H) Responsibilities of the President or Designee

The President shall announce the RTP Timetable after recommendations, if any, by the appropriate faculty committee. (14, 15)

The President shall follow the specific deadlines outlined for various personnel actions in Articles 13 and 14 of the CBA.

The President may review for completeness each file from all Candidates for promotion and/or tenure.

The President may identify, request and provide existing materials related to evaluation which do not appear in the file and request that any irrelevant material be removed from the file. In cases where the President requests that the Candidate add or remove material to the file, this request shall be made in writing to the Custodian of the File within the specified deadline. In cases where the President adds material to the file via the COF, it shall be done within the specified deadline. The Custodian of the File shall inform the Candidate of this addition.

The President shall consider a decision in relation to external review. Both the President and the faculty member undergoing review must agree to external review.

The President shall review and consider the Performance Review recommendations and relevant material and make a final decision on retention, tenure, or promotion. For probationary employees holding a joint appointment in more than one Department, the President shall make a single decision regarding retention, tenure, or promotion. (13, 14, 15)

The President shall review and consider the Performance Review recommendations and relevant material and information, [and the availability of funds for promotion – not in the CBA]. (14)

Should the President make a personnel decision on any basis not directly related to the professional qualifications, work performance, or personal attributes of the individual faculty member in question, those reasons shall be reduced to writing and entered into the Personnel Action File and shall be immediately provided the faculty member. (11)

The President shall provide a written copy of the decision with reasons to the Custodian of the File, who will provide it to the faculty member undergoing review and to all levels of review.

The President shall maintain confidentiality of the file, of deliberations and of recommendations, pursuant to articles (15).

I) Responsibilities of the Custodian of the File

The Custodian of the File shall notify all Candidates, Department Chairs, and Deans one semester in advance of the scheduled required for reviews for retention, reappointment, tenure and/or promotion. In May, the COF shall notify all faculty members and the Deans/Director of the CSUSM RTP Timetable for the following academic year. The COF shall notify all Candidates that the Faculty Center, the Deans, Department Chairs or equivalents and other appropriate resources are available to provide advice, guidance, and direction in constructing their WPAF.

The COF shall provide each new faculty unit employee no later than fourteen (14) days after the start of fall semester written notification of the evaluation criteria and procedures in effect at the time of her/his initial appointment. In addition, the faculty unit employee shall be advised of any changes to those criteria and procedures prior to the commencement of the evaluation process. (12, 15)

The COF shall receive the initial file, and date and stamp the initial page of the file.

The COF shall maintain confidentiality of the files.

Only when dire circumstances exist may a WPAF be turned in late. The COF will determine what constitutes dire circumstances.

Within two working days of the end of the review for completeness, the COF shall notify the Candidate of the need to add required and additional documentation requested by the Department Chair, review committee chairs, or administrators. If the Candidate fails to submit the required materials and a reviewing party submits the materials, the COF will notify the Candidate of materials that others add to the file.

In cases where the Department Chair wishes to submit a separate recommendation, but is ineligible to make recommendations for all Candidates, the Custodian of the File will place a form letter into the WPAF of the Candidates not receiving a separate recommendation that explains the reason that no Department Chair letter was submitted to the file.

The COF shall notify the Candidate of any other additional items to be added to the file along with the Candidate’s right to rebut or request deletion.

If a Candidate scheduled for review submits no WPAF, the COF shall place a letter in a file folder stating that no file was submitted. A copy of the letter will be sent to the appropriate Dean and the Candidate.

The COF shall ensure that all who review a file sign in each time they review the file. The COF shall maintain a log of action for each file.

If any party of the review process, including the Candidate, indicates that they want an external review, the COF shall administer the process as outlined in the CBA (15) and the University Retention, Tenure, and Promotion (RTP) documents. That is, the COF shall advise the President of the request and, if the request is approved by the President with the concurrence of the Candidate, the Custodian of the File shall administer the process.

The COF shall receive, process, and hold all recommendations and responses and/or rebuttals during each step of the process.

The COF shall monitor the progress of all evaluations ensuring that proper notification is given to the Candidate, each committee, and the appropriate administrators as specified in these procedures. The COF shall provide copies of the evaluations and recommendations to the Candidates and the reviewing parties. The COF shall document each notification.

If the COF becomes aware of a possible violation of either of the CBA or RTP policy, the COF may advise the relevant parties as necessary and when appropriate.

IV. PRINCIPLES FOR THE REVIEW PROCESS

A) General Principles

Faculty shall be evaluated in accordance with the Unit 3 CBA as well as standards approved for their Departments or equivalent units (when such standards exist), standards approved by their College/Library/School/SSP-AR, and in accordance with this policy. In case of conflict between the Department and College/Library/School/SSP-AR standards, the College/Library/School/SSP-AR standards shall prevail. The policies and procedures in this document are subject to Board of Trustees policies, Title 5 of the California Administrative Code, California Education Code, the Unit 3 CBA, and other applicable State and Federal laws.

Faculty members will present the relevant evidence in each category of performance. Each level of review is responsible for evaluating the quality and significance of all evidence presented.

Everyone, at all levels of review, shall read the Candidate’s file.

Committee members shall work together to come to consensus.

Retention, tenure, and promotion of a faculty member always shall be determined on the basis of performance of professional responsibilities as defined by the CBA (20) and the University and Department/Unit/ College/Library/School/SSP-AR documents, demonstrated by the evidence in the WPAF. In the evaluation of teaching performance, student evaluation forms shall not constitute the sole evidence of teaching quality. No recommendation shall be based on a Candidate’s beliefs, or on any other basis that would constitute an infringement of academic freedom.

The Candidate shall have access to her/his WPAF at all reasonable times except when the WPAF is actually being reviewed at some level.

Prior to the final decision, Candidates for promotion may withdraw, without prejudice, from consideration at any level of review.

Maintaining confidentiality is an extremely serious obligation on the part of committee reviewers and administrators. All parties to the review need to be able to discuss a Candidate’s file openly, knowing that this discussion will remain confidential. All parties to the review shall maintain confidentiality, respecting their colleagues, who, by virtue of election to a personnel committee, have placed their trust in each other. Deliberations and recommendations pursuant to evaluation shall be confidential. (15) There may be a need for the parties to the review to discuss the Candidate’s file with other levels of review when all levels do not agree. Also, the Candidate may request a meeting with parties to the review at any level. These particular discussions fall within the circle of confidentiality and comply with this policy. Otherwise, reviewing parties shall not discuss the file with anyone. Candidates who believe that confidentiality has been broken may pursue relief under the CBA. (10)

Service in the personnel evaluation process is part of the normal and reasonable duties of tenured faculty, Department Chairs, and administrative levels of review. Lobbying or harassment of parties to the review in the performance of these duties constitutes unprofessional conduct. Other University policies cover harassment as well. The statement here is not intended to restrict the University in any way from fulfilling the terms of other policies that cover harassment.

When a probationary faculty member does not receive tenure following the mandatory sixth year review, the University’s contract with the individual shall conclude at the end of the seventh year of service, unless the faculty member is granted by the President a subsequent probationary appointment or a terminal year appointment. (13)

B) Standards Applied in Different Types of Decisions

Review for Retention of Probationary Faculty
(a) Whenever a probationary faculty member receives reappointment, CSUSM shall provide to the Candidate a review that identifies any areas of weakness.
(b) To the extent possible and appropriate, the University should provide opportunities to improve performance in the identified area(s).

Review for Granting of Tenure
(a) The granting of tenure requires a more rigorous application of the criteria than reappointment.
(b) A Candidate for tenure at CSUSM shall show sustained high quality achievement in support of the Mission of the University in the areas of teaching, research and creative activity, and service (for teaching faculty and librarians) or in the primary duties as assigned in the job description, continuing education/professional development, and service (for Librarians and SSP-ARs).
(c) Normally, tenure review will occur in the sixth year of service at CSUSM or one or two years earlier in cases where the Candidate has been granted service credit. Tenure review prior to the normal year of consideration requires clear evidence that the Candidate has a sustained record of achievement that fulfills all criteria for tenure as specified in University, College/Library/School, and Department standards.
(d) An earned doctorate or an appropriate terminal or professional degree that best reflects the standard practices in an individual field of study is required for tenure. In exceptional cases, individuals with a truly distinguished record of achievement at the national and/or international level will qualify for consideration for purposes of granting tenure. An ad hoc committee consisting of three members jointly appointed by the Chair of the Promotion and Tenure Committee and the Department Chair shall judge all exceptions. This ad hoc committee shall make a recommendation to the President for or against awarding tenure.

Review for Promotion
(a) Promotion to Associate Professor, Associate Librarian or SSP-AR II requires a more rigorous application of the criteria than reappointment.
(b) Promotion to the rank of Professor, Librarian or SSP-AR III shall require evidence of substantial and sustained professional growth at the Associate rank as defined by University, College/Library/School/SSP-AR, and Department standards.
(c) In promotion decisions, reviewing parties shall give primary consideration to performance during time in the present rank. Promotion prior to the normal year of consideration requires clear evidence that the Candidate has a sustained record of achievement that fulfills all criteria for promotion as specified in University, College/Library/School, and Department standards. For early promotion, a sustained record of achievement should demonstrate that the Candidate has a record comparable to that of a Candidate who successfully meets the criteria in all three categories for promotion in the normal period of service.

College/Library/School/SSP-AR Standards
(a) A College or equivalent unit shall develop standards for the evaluation of faculty members of that College or equivalent unit.
(b) College or equivalent unit standards shall not conflict with law, the Unit 3 CBA or University policy. In no case shall College standards require lower levels of performance than those required by law or University policy.
(c) Written College or equivalent unit standards shall address:

Those activities which fall under the categories of Teaching Performance, Scholarly and Creative Activity, and Service;

A description of standards used to judge the quality of performance;

The criteria employed in making recommendations for retention, tenure, and promotion.

(d) These standards shall be reviewed by the Faculty Affairs Committee for compliance with university, CSU, and Unit 3 CBA policies and procedures. Once compliance has been verified, the College/Library/School/SSP-AR standards will be recommended to the Academic Senate for approval.

Departmental Standards
(a) A Department or equivalent unit may develop standards for the evaluation of faculty members of that Department or equivalent unit.
(b) Department or equivalent unit standards shall not conflict with law or University policy. In no case shall Department standards require lower levels of performance than those required by law or University policy.
(c) Written Department or equivalent unit standards shall address:

Those activities which fall under the categories of Teaching Performance, Scholarly and Creative Activity, and Service;

A description of standards used to judge the quality of performance;

The criteria employed in making recommendations for retention, tenure, and promotion.

(d) The Dean/Director of the College/Library/School/SSP-AR shall review the Department standards for conformity to College/Library/School/SSP-AR standards. If the Dean finds it in conformance, the Dean will forward the Department standards to the Faculty Affairs Committee. The Faculty Affairs Committee has the responsibility to verify and ensure compliance with university, CSU, and Unit 3 CBA policies and procedures. Once compliance has been verified, the Department standards will be forwarded to the Provost for review. The Provost will provide the Faculty Affairs Committee with a recommendation (with explanation) regarding approval of the Department standards. The Faculty Affairs committee will base its approval of the standards on its own review and the recommendation of the Provost. Once approved, Department standards will be forwarded to Academic Senate as an information item. Departments or equivalent units shall follow this approval process each time they wish to change their standards.

C) Joint Appointments

Appointment: A “Joint Appointment” is an appointment made jointly in more than one academic department or equivalent unit. [CBA 12.1] Criteria for individual Joint Appointments shall be set forth in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), in accordance with the “Instructions—Memorandum of Understanding for Joint Appointment.”

﻿Evaluation: For faculty with a Joint Appointment, reviews shall be conducted by a committee with representation from each department in which the individual holds an appointment. [CBA 15.13]

Election of Joint Appointment Peer Review Committee (PRC):
The Joint Appointment PRC shall consist of three eligible faculty members. The election of the Joint Appointment PRC members shall adhere to established Department/Unit PRC election procedures as much as possible.
The Joint Appointment PRC requires that one eligible faculty member be selected by the tenure-track faculty in each Department/Unit party to the joint appointment, plus one eligible faculty member nominated by the Candidate.
Each Department/Unit shall run an election to elect its member for the Joint Appointment PRC. [Membership eligibility shall adhere to the University RTP Policy and the CBA.] In Department(s)/unit(s) that have elected common members, the Joint Appointment PRC member shall be selected from the two common members. In the case of insufficient eligible members, the Department/Unit shall elect its Joint Appointment PRC member from a related academic discipline. [CBA 15.40]In the case where the Joint Appointment establishes that one Department/Unit has a greater weight, the third member shall be nominated by the Candidate from the Candidate’s “majority Department/Unit.” In the case of a 50/50 Joint Appointment, the Candidate may nominate from either Department/Unit. In the case of insufficient eligible members, the Candidate shall nominate a member from a related academic discipline. [CBA 15.40] The Candidate’s nominee must receive endorsement of a simple majority of the faculty in each Department/Unit in order to be elected to the Joint Appointment PRC.

Responsibilities of Joint Appointment PRC: Conduct a review of the Candidate’s WPAF according to:
(a) Departmental/Unit standards, college and the university policies
(b) The Collective Bargaining Agreement
(c)Memorandum of Understanding

Memorandum of Understanding: Criteria for individual Joint Appointments shall be set forth in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that establishes the distribution of work expected in the three areas (teaching, research and service). The MOU shall set forth how Department/Unit RTP standards apply. [See MOU Instructions]
The MOU shall be placed in the Personnel Action File (PAF). The MOU is a required element in the Working Personnel Action File (WPAF). If the MOU is changed, it will be placed in the PAF, and it, as well as all previous versions of the MOU, shall be placed in the WPAF.

V. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

A. In the policies and procedures prescribed by this document, “is” is informative, “shall” is mandatory, “may” is permissive, “should” is conditional, and “will” is intentional.

B. The numbers in parentheses refer to sections of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (in effect at the time of the adoption of this document) between the Board of Trustees of The California State University and the California Faculty Association.

C. The following terms – important to understanding faculty policies and procedures for retention, tenure, and promotion – are herein defined:

Administrator: an employee serving in a position designated as management or supervisory in accordance with the Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act. (2)

Candidate: a faculty unit employee being evaluated for retention, tenure, or promotion.

CBA: Collective Bargaining Agreement between the California Faculty Association and the Board of Trustees of the California State University for Unit 3 (Faculty).

CFA: the California Faculty Association or the exclusive representative of the Union. (2)

College/Library/School/SSP-AR: College of Business Administration (CoBA); College of Education, Health and Human Services (CEHHS); College of Humanities, Arts, Behavioral and Social Sciences (CHABSS); College of Science and Mathematics (CSM); Library; and Student Services Professional, Academic Related (SSP- AR).

Confidentiality: confidential matter is private, secret information whose unauthorized disclosure could be prejudicial. Given the RTP Procedure, confidentiality applies to the circle of those reviewing a file in a given year.

CSU: the California State University.

CSUSM: California State University San Marcos.

Custodian of the File (COF): the administrator designated by the President who strives to maintain accurate and relevant Personnel Action Files and to ensure that the CSUSM RTP Timetable is followed. (11)

Day: a calendar day. (2)

Dean/Director: the administrator responsible for the college/unit.

Department: the faculty unit employees within an academic department or other equivalent academic unit. (2)

DepartmentChair: the faculty member appointed by the president or designee to serve as the director/coordinator of the faculty unit employees within an academic department or other equivalent academic unit. (20)

Equivalent Academic Unit: any unit that is equivalent to an academic department.

Evaluation: a written assessment of a faculty member’s performance. An evaluation shall not include a recommendation for action.

Faculty Unit Employee: a member of bargaining Unit 3. (2) See also Candidate.

Joint Appointment: an appointment made jointly in more than one academic department or equivalent unit.

Librarian: those individuals who have achieved the rank of full Librarian.

Merit awards: in various CBAs, the CSU and CFA have agreed upon different terms and different names for merit awards, such as Merit Salary Adjustments, Performance Step Salary Increases and Faculty Merit Increases. If they are in effect during a review, merit awards are separate from the Retention, Tenure, and Promotion process, and thus have no bearing on the set of policies and procedures that follows.

Peer Review Committee (PRC): the committee of full-time, tenured faculty unit employees whose purpose is to review and recommend faculty unit employees who are being considered for retention, tenure, and promotion. (15.40)

President: the chief executive officer of the university or her/his designee. (2)

Probation, Normal Period of: the normal period of probation shall be a total of six (6) years of full-time probationary service and credited service, if any. Any deviation from the normal six (6) year probationary period, other than credited service given at the time of initial appointment, shall be the decision of the President following her/his consideration of recommendations from the department or equivalent unit, Dean/Director, appropriate administrators, and the Promotion and Tenure Committee. (13)

Probationary Faculty: the term probationary faculty unit employee refers to a full-time faculty unit employee appointed with probationary status and serving a period of probation. (13)

Professor: those individuals who have achieved the rank of full professor.

Promotion: the advancement of a probationary or tenured faculty unit employee who holds academic or librarian rank to a higher academic or librarian rank or of a counselor faculty unit employee to higher classification. (14)

Promotion, Early consideration for: in some circumstances, a faculty unit employee may, upon application, be considered for early promotion to Associate Professor or Professor, Associate Librarian or Librarian, SSP-AR II or SSP-AR III prior to the normal period of service. (14)

Promotion and Tenure Committee (P & T Committee): an all-University committee composed of full-time, tenured Professors and a Librarian elected according to the faculty constitution. The University charges the P & T Committee to make recommendations for tenure and promotion. When SSP-ARs are under review, an SSP-AR III will be added to the P & T Committee for the SSP-AR review only.

Rebuttal/Response: a written statement intended to present opposing or clarifying evidence or arguments to recommendations resulting from a performance review at any level of review. It is not intended for presentation of new information/material. (15)

Recommendation: the written end product of each level of a performance review. A recommendation shall be based on the WPAF and shall include a written statement of the reasons for the recommendation. A copy of the recommendation and the written reasons for it is provided to the faculty member at each level of review. (15)

Retention: authorization to continue in probationary status.

RTP: retention, tenure, and/or promotion.

RTPTimetable: A timetable that lists the order of review and establishes dates for the review process at each level for a particular year. This calendar is based on the approved academic year calendar. The President, after consideration of recommendations of the appropriate faculty committee, shall announce the RTP Timetable for each year. (13)

ServiceCredit: the President, upon recommendation of the Dean/Director after consulting with the relevant department or equivalent unit, may grant to a faculty unit employee up to two (2) years service credit for probation based on previous service at a post-secondary education institution, previous full-time CSU employment, or comparable experience. (13)

Tenure: the right to continued permanent employment at the campus as a faculty unit employee except when such employment is voluntarily terminated or is terminated by the CSU pursuant to the CBA or law. (13)

Working Personnel Action File (WPAF): that portion of the Personnel Action File specifically generated for use in a given evaluation cycle. (2) The WPAF shall include all forms and documents, all information specifically provided by the Candidate, and information provided by faculty unit employees, students, and academic administrators. It also shall include all faculty and administrative level evaluations, recommendations from the current cycle, and all rebuttal statements and responses submitted.)